MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225323783 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp15491

The Effects of Sexist Attitudes on Sexual Harassment at the Royal Military College

2022· article· en· W4225323783 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Rhea Correya

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarassmentOfficerMasculinityMythologyContext (archaeology)PsychologyIdentity (music)HonourCriminologySocial psychologyGender studiesPolitical scienceSociologyLawHistoryArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) has frequented the news headline as more and more stories come to light about issues of sexual harassment and misconduct within the Canadian military. The CAF has attempted to change these attitudes through the implementation of training and Operation Honour. However, despite these efforts, sexist attitudes continue to exist within this military context (Scopio, et al 2020). These attitudes are apparent at the Royal Military College of Canada (RMC) where future officers of the CAF attend university (Statistics Canada, 2020). Incidents relating to sexual harassment and sexual assault occur and are an established problem for the College (Statistics Canada, 2020). Previous research demonstrated a relationship between feminist identity and rape myth acceptance (RMA), between feminist identity and sexual harassment, and between RMA and sexual harassment (Begany & Milburn, 2002; LeMaire et al., 2016; Scopio., et al 2020). This study aimed to examine whether rape myth acceptance mediates the relationship between feminist identity and sexual harassment attitudes at the Royal Military College. Using a sample of n = 144 officer cadets at RMC, it was determined that RMA demonstrates partial indirect effects on the relationship between feminist identity and sexual harassment. References Begany, J. J., & Milburn, M. A. (2002). Psychological Predictors of Sexual Harassment: Authoritarianism, Hostile Sexism, and Rape Myths. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 3(2), 119–126. https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.3.2.119 LeMaire, K. L., Oswald, D. L., & Russell, B. L. (2016). Labeling sexual victimization experiences: The role of sexism, rape myth acceptance, and tolerance for sexual harassment. Violence and Victims, 31(2), 332–346. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.vv-d-13-00148 Maxwell, A. (2020, October 8). Experiences of unwanted sexualized and discriminatory behaviours and sexual assault among students at Canadian military colleges, 2019. Government of Canada, Statistics Canada. Retrieved February 15, 2022, from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2020001/article/00011-eng.htm Scoppio, G., Otis, N., Yan, Y. (L., & Hogenkamp, S. (2020). Experiences of officer cadets in Canadian military colleges and CIVILIAN UNIVERSITIES: A gender perspective. Armed Forces & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327x20905121

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicSexual Assault and Victimization StudiesFrench-language works237,207